Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Effects of adding R-BoT + plus verticalization-based robotic locomotor training to conventional rehabilitation in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly recovery of gait and trunk control during the subacute phase after stroke is crucial for long-term functional outcomes. Robotic-assisted rehabilitation enabling upright positioning, weight-bearing, and repetitive stepping-like movements has emerged as a promising adjunct to conventional therapy. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether adding R-BoT + plus verticalization-based robotic locomotor training to conventional inpatient rehabilitation leads to greater improvement in gait independence than conventional rehabilitation alone. The secondary aims were to assess the effects of the intervention on trunk control, cognitive function, activities of daily living (ADL), balance, and lower-extremity motor function.
methodsThis single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted in an inpatient rehabilitation setting and enrolled patients with subacute stroke and severe gait impairment. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either R-BoT + plus verticalization robotic locomotor training combined with conventional rehabilitation or conventional rehabilitation alone. Both groups received conventional rehabilitation five times per week for 4 weeks. The experimental group also received R-BoT + plus verticalization-based robotic locomotor training with the same frequency and duration (20 sessions; 30 min per session). Outcomes were assessed at baseline (preintervention) and postintervention, with a 3-month follow-up for gait independence.
resultsPatients who received R-BoT + plus training demonstrated significantly greater improvement in the Functional Ambulation Category than the control group. Mixed-effects modeling showed sustained benefits favoring the experimental group at postintervention and at 3-month follow-up. Although the overall change in Trunk Control Test scores did not differ significantly between groups, an exploratory baseline-adjusted robust regression suggested that patients with lower baseline trunk control experienced significantly greater post-intervention improvement in the experimental group. Other functional outcomes, including cognition, balance, ADL, and lower-extremity motor function, improved in both groups without significant between-group differences.
conclusionsR-BoT + plus verticalization-based robotic locomotor training provides additional benefits for gait independence and trunk control when added to conventional rehabilitation in patients with subacute stroke, particularly among those with greater initial impairment.
trial registrationThis study was prospectively registered at the Clinical Research Information Service (CRiS), Republic of Korea (registration number: KCT0010040).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.